Hmmm, maybe this is the genesis of an archetypical character!
And when Futurama-style “head in a jar” technology is perfected, caring for special-needs loved ones will be easier still!
Add me to the list of people who don’t see the problem. It makes it a hell of a lot easier for the parents to care for Ashley, which in turn makes things much better for Ashley. But even if it didn’t improve Ashley’s quality of life, I would still support it (as long as it didn’t negatively impact her quality of life), because these parents are in for a fucking long nightmare of caring for a total invalid with the mind of a 6-month old. Why shouldn’t they take steps to make it easier on themselves? It’s not like they aren’t sacrificing enough.
Yeah! The OP’s parents shoulda removed his uterus, the estrogen-drowning twit.
Seriously, his threads make me so mad I can only dunk my head repeatedly into a basin filled with sulfuric acid while dragging my palms across HIV-tainted needles with my feet jammed into galoshes filled with lava while being whipped by a foul-mouthed midget wielding a cat-o-nine, only the “nine” are strands of barbed wire, while watching heartbreaking videos of my favourite cat (the one that got run over last year) and using a nailgun on my kneecaps while my scalp is sliced off Thomas Becket-style by Florence Henderson, who’s trying to claim triple scale and wants a trailer with a masseuse.
I’m doing this even now.
[sub]ouch[/sub]
The justifications are given on their website.
I have to admit, now I’m starting to understand their reasons a wee bit better. It does make sense, even if it sounds extreme.
(But I stand by what I said-that calling EVERY person like Ashley “pillow angels” is somewhat degrading. If that’s their nickname for her, that’s fine and even sweet. But everyone with her condition? I dunno)
While I think referring to EVERYONE with that condition, like I said, is overboard, the above disgusts me. YOU disgust me. But that’s nothing new.
I’ll admit, the term ‘pillow angel’ squicks me out. To my mind it’s less honest than even vegetable would be, and so I find it more disturbing.
But, as others in this thread have pointed out, I’m not about to condemn the parents invovled for the terminology. They’re the ones who have to deal with it, not me. I won’t use the term, but I’m not about to forbid them from using it, either.
What I’d like to know is what the devil is so offensive, about giving a found toddler a nickname, rather than simply calling her Baby XYZ? The reasons for the use of the nickname Pumpkin were obvious, and while they may have been cutesy, it makes more sense to my mind than that people can still be heard to talk about Baby Jessica. Of course, I’m sure I’m on the OP’s hit list for referring to The Monster from time to time, too. Frankly, I find the use of the nickname Pumpkin less disturbing than the name/title given of one of the victims of the 1944 Hartford Circus Fire which had a similar goal: Little Miss 1965, was likewise labelled in an effort to publicize her face and plight so her identity could be found.
People use nicknames, and especially when the real name of a person is not known, it’s a way for people to humanize events around them. Railing against that makes as much sense to my mind as railing against gravity.
What the hell is wrong with me that this stuff gets me to cacklin’ my head off like a damn fool? What is wrong with me?
When you find out, will you tell me? I’ve got the same problem.
Someone misspelled “AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHGHGHGHG”
I just don’t understand the rage towards these people for what they did. What purpose does it serve a 6 month old baby to weigh 130 lbs? What 6 month old baby wants a uterus? Or boobs? They have zero comprehension of/use for either. And who the hell wants to deal with a 6 month old baby on her period? What purpose would that serve? It seems to me that preventing menstruation is actually the kindest thing imaginable.
This girl is no worse off than she was prior, and her parents’ lives aren’t going to get even harder.
I don’t see how anybody could have anything but compassion for these folks.
And I think “Pillow Angel” is the verbal equivalent of Precious Moments figurines.
Blegh.
Ah, well, don’t I feel foolish now. Thanks for that information, Cazzle, I was just going off the news article. Those are some very good reasons for removing her breast buds.
I’m gonna chime in with a little more personal justification for the rage towards what these folks did.
A lot of the people in this thread who’re defending Ashley’s anony-ancestors are taking little pieces of the story at face value and saying, “well THAT’s not so bad…!” Like ‘Pillow Angel’ just being a harmless nickname, just like ‘Baby cakes!’ Except that these latter parents are not going so far as to batter and fry their child so she fits in boxes easier, which may just make it easier for them to take care of her for the rest of their lives.
Here’s part one of my huge problem with this surgery being an option: Calling a mentally defunct human a ‘Pillow Angel’ is touching and sweet. Making the tough decision to enact optional surgeries to restrict or prevent inconvenient bodily functions in a bed-ridden human is ethically iffy, but acceptable if it’s the only option to ensure good care.
Overdoing the cutting-up-our-daughter bit so she looks like a child for the rest of her unnatural life while also calling her a ‘Pillow Angel,’ as though she actually were just a little emotional accessory instead of a human being who, if it weren’t for the misfortunes of genetics and neurochemistry, would be a fully-functioning human with lots of thoughts and hopes of her own - those two together make this right nearly the creepiest thing I’ve heard of in medicine (and I’m a fan of gender studies).
As others have pointed out, there is no reason to remove her breasts. If ‘desexualizing her will protect her!’ is a reason, then, hell, why don’t we support some crazy personality cult who want to ‘desexualize’ their kids to everyone except their true leader cuz that’s how he likes 'em? Or maybe some entrepreneur M.D. can make the first Promise-Ring/Hysterectomy ceremony. Free semi-permanent hormone treatment with every breast-bud elimination!
Whee, slippery slopes are fun. Seriously, tho - concentrating on her sexuality at this age is exactly the reason this situation weirds me the fuck out. The other excuse we’ve heard is that her breasts might grow too large to make sitting or positioning her comfortable. At least, I couldn’t find any more justified reasoning on the linked blog. All I can say to that is, well, hormone treatments are expensive even if they’re standard ones. The cost of a breast reduction at adulthood would be (at best) comparable to, or (at worst) a hell of a lot less than the cost of all those specialized hormone treatments. The only other explanation I can think of to cover this expense is, once again, objectification of their dear Pillow Angel. They want to make her a child forever, because that’s what they’ve idolized. Or maybe they’re just afraid it’ll be harder to love her if her body grew up. I don’t know.
In any case, permanently altering the body of an unconsenting human being so her body matches her mental capacity just sounds like poor care and medical ethics. I’m a pretty progressive type - if someone wants to modify their own body in unusual ways, that’s fine, more power to them, because it’s their body. Mr. & Mrs. Ashley Sr. apparently think she’s theirs to toy with, and that breaks lines of consent and thus pisses me way the hell off.
I think the issue of consent is a moot point here–she can not and will never be able to give it. And this isn’t just about ‘desexualising her’–it’s about making it easier to care for her, and by extension, improve her quality of life. As far as removing her breasts–I don’t know if you have any but they can be annoying. I think that since they did have the operation done at the same time, rather than later, it saves her the discomfort of either having them or going through another surgery to remove them. If you read the site it was the most controversial part of the process, but honestly having it done then added no extra discomfort and potentially saved her some (they also had her appendix removed, for similar reasons). All that said, I think it’s a very grey area, and having no experience in such situations, I’m not about to say that what they did was right or wrong, but that I think they did what they truly thought was best for their girl.
I do have to agree, though, that ‘pillow angel’ just squicks me out. It sounds like a plush toy, not a person.
“Make her a child forever?” Are you serious?
The girl has the mental capacity of a 6 month old baby. Her parents can’t “make” her a child forever. She IS a child forever. Not just a child, but a fucking infant.
I doubt her parents consider her “theirs to toy with.” She is, however much they love her, a permanent burden. She will never grow up. She will never even be able to hold her head up or think in words. Much less miss her choice to hit puberty, menstruate, and grow to the point that she’s the size of an adult with the mental capacity of an infant.
Who are you to say that this girl’s right to a physical maturity she will never realize or appreciate is greater than her parents’ right to take care of her as best they can? And to make decisions on her behalf?
It boggles my mind.
I have a friend (yadda yadda) who works with severly developmentally disabled adults, the worst you can imagine. No, worse then that.
Some of these folks were given STDs by their family members. (vomits)
If I were Ashley’s parents, I’d want to do the exact same thing, no question.
It’s because of replies like Robin Goodfellow’s that I had this to say way back in post # 22:
Truly, I’m astounded that in light of what anecdotal evidence that can be shared, further explanations and the typical ability for humans to extrapolate out one set of circumstances for application to their own processes, they still are only able to project something totally unrelated (IE: an adult versus an infant, as is this case) from themselves onto the situation. Without regard for common sense, quality of life (here as filters down to Ashley through her caregiver parents) and / or being human. Unreal.
I suggest a write-in campaign to change it to “Sheet Meat”.
So because I haven’t had your particular experiences, I must be devoid of common sense and/or humanity. Brilliant. Is this how you people relate to your fellow humans?
Try bringing some actual points to the argument. They are playing with her body. The evidence I presented makes it very clear to me that they consider her a plaything; an emotional trophy. There are reasons for their opting for her surgeries, but they are wildly disparate compared to the possible aesthetic choice that seems inherent in the fact that she’s referred to as a ‘pillow angel.’
As I said, I’m fine with altering her body to better care for her, as long as it’s justifiable and, y’know, doesn’t have to do with preventing incest - there are criminal justice systems for that. It’s when the optional surgeries follow a definite pattern of immortalizing/infantilization and the enactors use terminology to match that my creep-out sense starts tingling.
And, unlike some minds in this forum, I don’t assume that everyone should agree with my opinion. That’s why it’s mine, and why I qualified it as such.
The fact that she’s mentally a child means nothing to me. There are a lot of people, comatose or otherwise, who are at that or lesser levels of mental functionality. That’s not an immediate reason to alter their physical state just so everything looks all pretty.